Avro Lancastrian

Post by **DaveB** » 23 May 2007, 18:18

Announcement..

CBFSVA are pleased to announce our acceptance of 6 Avro Lancastrian aircraft to the fleet. Two aircraft are currently in the US (KORD, KJFK), 2 at EGWU and 1 each at EGCC and EGPK.

The Lancastrian is a long-range, 4-engined aircraft based on the successful Lancaster bomber and carries 13pax plus cargo. Two flight models are currently available.. one each of payware and freeware. The freeware model can be downloaded from Classic British Files and is by Paul Edwards and Manfred Jahn.. the payware model is from Plane Design.

Testing of both models has shown the PD Lancastrian to be a little long in the tooth but for VC freaks, this is the only option. The freeware model has a better FD but no VC. There were a number of other differences between the two models, not least of which was the payware versions superior speed and fuelburn. So that the freeware users do not dipout, a modified cfg is available HERE . The modified cfg brings the speed and fuelburn close to the payware model while retaining the original flight characteristics.

Note that the freeware Lancastrian does not suffer the same refuelling issue as the authors York, despite there being one tank extra

FSNav entry..
[VA Lancastrian II]
withoutash=1
climbspeed=150
climbfuel=830
climbrate=700
cruisespeed=168
cruisefuel=612
cruisealtitude=7500
descentspeed=90
descentfuel=620
descentrate=800
fuelmeasure=2
revision=3

This is primarily for the freeware model but isn't too far off for the payware model

Figures are based on a takeoff setting of 3000/+12.. climb of 2650/+7 and cruise 2400/+4.

All TR requests to JohnP in the usual manner.

EDIT : A problem has come to light, possibly due to difffering PC setups which causes the PD Lanc' to stop using fuel as recorded in the Client Window when using 'Standard' refuel method. 'Compare' fuel method seems to work OK. If you use the PD Lanc' please ensure that correct fuel useage is being recorded.

Regards

DaveB :tab:

Paul K · Post by **Paul K** » 23 May 2007, 18:28

Please don't do this to me, Dave. I simply can't devote the time to a virtual airline, but now my tongue is hanging out and I'm whimpering like a very sad whiney thing. I absolutely love the Lancastrian ( in my case the PD payware one ), and would dearly love to fly her 'commercially'.

One day, perhaps. :sad:

Post by **DaveB** » 23 May 2007, 20:13

I know what you mean Paul. The PD Lanc has been sitting unused on my system and now I have the opportunity to make it pay.. there's a York too and I love that :shock: It's so difficult to decide what to fly now

ATB

DaveB :tab:

Paul K · Post by **Paul K** » 25 May 2007, 20:03

Dave, a couple of questions regarding the Lancastrian in CBFSVA service, if I may:

Presumably you have an airline livery, so is there any chance of a screenshot of the Plane Design one in her new colours ?

Also, have you ever carried out any tweaks or alterations to the PD one ? I mean fuel capacity or how she handles or whatever ?

Cheers !

Post by **DaveB** » 25 May 2007, 21:29

Hi Paul..

No Sir.. the only liveries we use are REAL ones

Our VA uses the correct aircraft on the correct routes with the correct liveries worn by as many as we can get hold of

Re the PD Lancastrian.. the best thing you can do is substitute the FD off the PD Lancaster if you have it. That will make it much closer to the mark

The only downside I can see of using the freeware model (if indeed it IS a downside) is that it flies with a 3deg nose down pitch which looks and feels a little odd. I know the nose was used for mailbags but even so.. 3deg seems a bit excessive :think:
The weight and performance of the PD model is close to advertised numbers as is the freeware one.. even though they're quite different. It depends where you get your info from. In order to make the freeware model competitive against the payware model (straight out of the box) I reduced it's empty weight, decreased the parasitic drag a smidge and adjusted the fuel_scalar. They're not identical now by any means but they're closer

ATB

DaveB :tab:

Paul K · Post by **Paul K** » 25 May 2007, 23:22

Great stuff, thanks Dave. Yes, I have the PD Lancaster package so I'll do as you suggest.

Post by **RAF_Quantum** » 28 May 2007, 11:41

Note added (in red) to original post to make aware of possible fuel useage problem.

Rgds

John